Bookshttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/5518
Sat, 25 May 2019 15:08:11 GMT2019-05-25T15:08:11ZExemplary Teaching Practices in Technology & Engineering Educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/83578
Hoepfl, Marie
Fri, 01 Jan 2016 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/835782016-01-01T00:00:00ZAs we work to (re)define the role of K-12 technology and engineering education in general, and more specifically its role within the rainbow of STEM education, some teacher educators have struggled to identify durable and comprehensive descriptions of classrooms and teachers that serve as ideals to illustrate the unique potential of technology and engineering education in educating our youth. The eight teachers’ stories contained in this book provide details about effective approaches used by technology teachers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels, in the United States and in two international settings. I extend deep and sincere gratitude to the colleagues who authored these rich descriptions, and to the teachers and the schools they highlight in these chapters.
On a procedural note, all teachers featured in this yearbook were given the option of being identified under a pseudonym; none opted to do so. Teachers and their school principals signed participant agreements. All photographs of students are used by permission.
I hope that this 61st yearbook of the Council on Technology and Engineering Teacher Education provides helpful insights to my fellow technology and engineering teacher educators, and inspiration to current and future classroom teachers in technology and engineering education and across the STEM disciplines.
61st Yearbook Editor
Marie Hoepfl
Appalachian State University﻿Creativity and Design in Technology & Engineering Educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/47790
Warner, Scott A.; Gemmill, Perry R.
Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/477902011-01-01T00:00:00ZCreativity has been associated with the peak experiences in one’s life. Giving birth to new ideas, relationships, and objects usually requires effort, perseverance, and know-how. Creative people are intrinsically motivated and rewarded with the joy that they receive from being engaged in design processes and the resultant outcomes. Creativity and design has been a global fundamental theme of technology education for over a century. Its ebb and flow of focus as content and pedagogy have fluctuated as the educational philosophies, teacher expertise, and economy have changed. K-12 basic education and conventional standards-based assessment have been structured around convergent thinking and right answers. Yet, the complex issues and problems of today’s advancing technological society often demand and reward critical examination, divergent thinking, and fresh, novel answers and solutions. The technological literacy and capability of educated citizens requires knowledge and skills of creative and designerly ways. The explicit identification of design themes and standards in Standards for Technological Literacy and the emergent focus on engineering design within our profession have reinforced the educational value of studying and practicing creativity and design in our schools. Creativity and design leading to innovation also has been recently promoted as the key to global economic competitiveness. The editors and authors of this Yearbook represent a variety of backgrounds, including classroom teachers, teacher educators, and supervisors who represent not only technology education but also architecture, neurology, design, engineering, industrial technology, and art education and crafts. This diversity has reinforced and enriched the total educational value of this Yearbook toward promoting creativity and design. We hope that the theory and perspectives presented in this Yearbook revitalize the pursuit of creativity and design within technology and engineering education. We believe that the precepts for teaching and learning the important concepts, principles, and practices embedded in creativity and design serve as an engaging catalyst for meaningful, productive, and fulfilling lives of all people in the 21st century.Research in Technology Educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/47789
Reed, Philip A.; LaPorte, James E.
Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/477892010-01-01T00:00:00ZTechnology education and the programs from which it evolved have a unique history. The emphasis on practical learning that formed the foundation for the field in the 1800s did not fit well with the concurrent liberal education movement and its focus on classical languages, philosophy, rhetoric, literature, and mathematics – applied learning simply did not connect with liberating the mind from the toil and drudgery of the workplace that existed once the industrial revolution had occurred. With the huge influx of immigrants seeking a better life, albeit survival, in the New World, the United States found that skilled workers were essential if the momentum of an increasingly healthier economy was to be maintained. Once again the field had to wrestle with how to increase its vitality, this time while trying to keep its general education values in light of increasing support for vocational education. The vision was to become a required subject in the education of all, encouraged by how science had successfully done so using political influence and backing in the early 1900s. Though admirable progress was made, the field simply did not have any analogy to the clout that scientists had nor the influence of politicians and the dollars they could garner – and, as is still true today, the field simply does not have the numbers. Perhaps the biggest impediment, though, was the lack of regard among those in power for the hands-on, practical experiences that represented the hallmark of the field. It could be argued that the emphasis on practical learning was carried too far. Master’s and doctoral programs in the field became allied with graduate programs in education that emphasized practice rather than research, thereby forfeiting the requisite research competencies and exposure to the culture of research. Even at this higher level of education, some degree programs allowed, or even encouraged, the completion of courses and independent studies that involved the development and honing of technical skills over theory. A culture developed whereby even professors did not value research and consequently passed this thinking on to their students. This attitude is still promulgated today to some extent as evidenced by those entering higher education aspiring to be exclusively teachers, hoping to “leave the research to others,” whoever those others might be. In many cases the doctoral dissertation becomes the best, and only, research the terminal degreed person will do. The climate of higher education has changed dramatically over the past few years. Even those institutions that thought of themselves as “teaching universities” have shifted their focus in light of the need to garner external funds through research grants to replace lost resources at the state level. Moreover, the rankings that are bestowed upon universities by a growing number of organizations have become more important in the competition for students and those rankings, in turn, are becoming increasingly linked to research activity and the scholarship that comes with it. As expectations for accountability rose, technology educators were increasingly being asked to support the value of programs based on research rather than testimonials and logic. It was within the foregoing context that this yearbook came about and influenced its organization. First, we realized that our field will not, at least in the foreseeable future, have enough qualified and motivated professionals to conduct the research that is needed, the lack of which scholars and leaders have reprimanded the field for decades. Short of doing the research in isolation, technology educators at least need to be able to extrapolate and generalize from the research of other disciplines that have a link to our own. Moreover, becoming aware of the research in other disciplines will enable technology educators to set priorities for our own research agenda, constrained by our limited human resources. Second, we believed that an investigation into research must necessarily be international in scope. The advantages of electronic technology facilitate international collaboration and enable technology educators to realize accomplishments never before possible. Globally, our numbers are sufficient and our challenges similar enough that we should move a collaborative research agenda forward. Third, we were committed to involving chapter authors who were scholars of high repute as well as those who were just embarking on a career in higher education and might be mentored into research and scholarship through the experience. With guidance from the Yearbook Committee of the Council for Technology Teacher Education, we identified experts in the topics addressed. However, the bottom line is that the authors demonstrated a passion for what we were asking them to do. The passion, commitment, and effort of the authors represented by the pages within are deeply appreciated.Essential Topics for Technology Educatorshttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19160
CTTE Yearbook Planning Committee
Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191602009-01-01T00:00:00ZWho's Who in Industrial Arts Teacher Educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19159
Pollock, John M; Bunten, Charles A.
Wed, 01 Jan 1969 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191591969-01-01T00:00:00ZCouncil on Technology Teacher Education Yearbook Indices Compendiumhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19158
Council on Technology Teacher Education (U.S.)
Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191582009-01-01T00:00:00ZEngineering and technology educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19157
Custer, Rodney L.; Erekson, Thomas L.; Council on Technology Teacher Education (U.S.)
Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191572008-01-01T00:00:00ZAssessment of technology educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19156
Hoepfl, Marie; Lindstrom, Michael R.
Mon, 01 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191562007-01-01T00:00:00ZInternational technology teacher educationhttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19155
Williams, P. John
Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191552006-01-01T00:00:00ZDistance and distributed learning environment : perspectives and strategieshttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/19154
Havice, William L.; Havice, Pamela A.
Sat, 01 Jan 2005 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/191542005-01-01T00:00:00Z